From Columbia University
Astronomers find clues to decades-long coronal heating mystery
Drs. Michael Hahn and Daniel Wolf Savin, research scientists at Columbia University’s Astrophysics Laboratory in New York, NY, found evidence that magnetic waves in a polar coronal hole contain enough energy to heat the corona and moreover that they also deposit most of their energy at sufficiently low heights for the heat to spread throughout the corona. The observations help to answer a 70-year-old solar physics conundrum about the unexplained extreme temperature of the Sun’s corona – known as the coronal heating problem.
Hahn and Savin analyzed data from the Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrometer onboard the Japanese satellite Hinode. They used observations of a polar coronal hole, a region of the Sun where the magnetic fields lines stretch from the solar surface far into interplanetary space. The findings were published on September 30th in the October 20th edition of The Astrophysical Journal.
To understand the coronal heating problem, imagine a flame coming out of an ice cube.
A similar effect occurs on the surface of the Sun. Nuclear fusion in the center of the Sun heats the solar core to 15 million degrees. Moving away from this furnace, by the time one arrives at the surface of the Sun the gas has cooled to a relatively refreshing 6000 degrees. But the temperature of the gas in the corona, above the solar surface, soars back up to over one million degrees. What causes this unexpected temperature increase has puzzled scientists since 1939.
Two dominant theories exist to explain this mystery. One attributes the heating to the loops of magnetic field which stretch across the solar surface and can snap and release energy. Another ascribes the heating to waves emanating from below the solar surface, which carry magnetic energy and deposit it in the corona. Observations show both of these processes continually occur on the Sun. But until now scientists have been unable to determine if either one of these mechanisms releases sufficient energy to heat the corona to such high temperatures.
Hahn and Savin’s recent observations show that magnetic waves are the answer. The advance opens up a realm of further questions; chief among them is what causes the waves to damp. Hahn and Savin are planning new observations to try to address this issue.
This research has been supported by the National Science Foundation Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences through the Solar, Heliospheric and Interplanetary Environment program.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If the Universe is electric, somebody must have put a red beacon on the top of my head. The dry cold air in NE Oregon puts my red Irish locks into charged up mode. Oh. Wait a minute. Somebody DID put a red beacon on the top of my head.
By the way, anybody here know why there is a rubber coating on the handle of a shopping cart? Or does the electric universe follow me into the grocery store?
The thin crust and the thick mantle have nothing to do with getting lucky.
Lucky is figurative. Had the amount of these radioactives been slightly higher then Earth surface would be heated over 500C now and a billion years into future. You seem to be set on evading this simple facet of your radioactive model. Are u scared of it?
From the known contents of U238, Th232, U235, and K40 we can calculate how much heat should be generated.
U make it sound like someones walked down a few flight of steps, picked a piece of Earth core and brought it back for examination. The radioactive contents u mention are estimates derived from the power output from the interior of the earth and there is no way to confirm them. Therefore the power source of the Earth’s interior is unknown and open to debate.
The galactic current is very good then to find a thundercloud and charging it to create lightning. Perhaps some aliens put a little beacon on each storm to guide the current…
Yes, electricity will find the lowest resistance path. Also matter is pulled towards galactic current just as current carrying electric cables attract static dust. This way, plasma, electric current and neutral matter naturally attract each other in the cosmos, cue interaction between them including 100 Megavolt water clouds on Earth.
pseudo-scientific quacks.
Care to name names? Scott and Peratt?
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 10:08 am
Had the amount of these radioactives been slightly higher then Earth surface would be heated over 500C now and a billion years into future. You seem to be set on evading this simple facet of your radioactive model. Are u scared of it?
But since it is not slightly higher there is no need to fear anything. Again you lack numbers. What is slightly higher? 0.1%, 1%, 10%, 50%, …
“From the known contents of U238, Th232, U235, and K40 we can calculate how much heat should be generated.”
U make it sound like someones walked down a few flight of steps, picked a piece of Earth core and brought it back for examination. The radioactive contents u mention are estimates derived from the power output from the interior of the earth and there is no way to confirm them. Therefore the power source of the Earth’s interior is unknown and open to debate.
There are several ways of getting that knowledge. One way is to measure it directly. In 2005 scientists in the KamLAND collaboration, based in Japan, showed that there was a way to measure the contribution directly by observing geoneutrinos – more precisely, geo-antineutrinos – emitted when radioactive isotopes decay [similar to the way we measure the neutrino flux generated by fusion in the Sun]. The radioactive heat is about about half of the heat in the interior. The other half is primordial heat left over from the formation of the Earth plus the heat generated by gravitational sinking of heavier material.
“Perhaps some aliens put a little beacon on each storm to guide the current…”
Yes…
“pseudo-scientific quacks”
Care to name names? Scott and Peratt?
You seem to do pretty well on your own. Do you know more?
Anyway, the homegrown \ ‘water clouds make their own charge separation’ lightning theory that was carefully cultivated over a century or 2 was dealt a blow in the 1990s when lightning above the clouds going into the ionosphere was 1st recorded and recognized. Sprites made theories of extra terrestrial voltage source much more plausible.
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 10:35 am
Sprites made theories of extra terrestrial voltage source much more plausible.
Every lightening bolt between cloud and ground produces a sprite above the cloud some milliseconds after the lightening. A sprite BTW is a cold plasma phenomenon akin to what you have in ordinary florescent tube discharges.
What is slightly higher? 0.1%, 1%, 10%, 50%
Use standard deviation. Given that most rocky moons and planets don’t appear to be geothermally active to anywhere near as much as Earth looks like we got way more than our fair share of radioactive material. If thats the case then there no reason to think that whatever caused this huge extra anomalous dollop of radioactives could not have concentrated an amount even more adrift from the average per rocky planet/moon. So whats Earth’s deviation of interior radioactives compared to the average of other planets? I don’t claim to be able to quantify it accurately, but I guess it to be around 500~5000% more. Bear in mind I think the radioactive geothermal source theory is wrong so trying to get accurate numbers for it is not a priority for me. If you want better numbers ask someone else.
here was a way to measure the contribution directly by observing geoneutrinos – more precisely, geo-antineutrinos – emitted when radioactive isotopes decay
Neutrinos are a common product in nuclear fusion too. I think the neutrinos they are detecting could be from the electric induced fusion reaction in the Earth’s interior.
The radioactive heat is about about half of the heat in the interior. The other half is primordial heat left over from the formation of the Earth plus the heat generated by gravitational sinking of heavier material.
I don’t believe the Earth was created from gravitational collapse of a load of dust 5BYa. I think it started out as an asteroid perhaps around 7-8BYA and grew by internal outpouring of molten rock, not external gravitation accretion of primordial matter. The source of this internal outpouring of rock was direct energy to matter conversion. The candidate for the source of the energy is the galactic current which continues to present day and is about 40% the power output of the sun. Awesome huh?
meemoe_uk:
I follow solar threads to learn because I know almost nothing about solar matters. So perhaps you would explain something you said which I don’t understand.
Concerning energy supplied to the Earth, at October 19, 2013 at 11:15 am you say
Well, I would be awed if you could convince me it is true.
Please explain why I notice the power output of the Sun which reaches the Earth but I don’t notice the energy of the galactic current which you claim exists.
Richard
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 11:15 am
I guess it to be around 500~5000% more.
So, slightly higher is 5000% higher…
I don’t believe the Earth was created from gravitational collapse of a load of dust 5BYa. I think it started out as an asteroid perhaps around 7-8BYA and grew by internal outpouring of molten rock…Awesome huh?
Awesome that somebody can believe such nonsense.
Every lightening bolt between cloud and ground produces a sprite above the cloud some milliseconds after the lightening.
Sure. The troposphere is the last barrier for the galactic current on its journey to Earth. as such a charge builds up at the top of the troposhere. When it cracks ( a lightning bolt ) this charge Earths, leaving behind room for more charge to fall from the ionosphere to the top of the troposphere, such charge begins falling immediately as the troposphere lightning discharges to Earth, but of there is a slight delay due to cause and effect but also pehaps because glow mode plasma current is slightly slower to radiate than arc mode.
Hi Rich,
Please explain why I notice the power output of the Sun which reaches the Earth but I don’t notice the energy of the galactic current which you claim exists.
Excluding electrical output, the power observed from the sun is near pure radiated energy ( and some solar wind ). The power output from Earth’s interior is mostly mass creation but with some energy. Since E=mc^2 a huge amount of energy is equivalent to a tiny amount of mass. That’s why a mass output of 40% sun’s power isn’t too obvious. But you can see it if you know what to be looking for. Volcanoes and the mid ocean rifts are pouring out new matter. Nearly all mountain ranges are gaining height at around 5mm a year. The Earth quakes as in adjusts to accommodate the new matter. These are all results of the Earth interior power source, which could be the galactic current.
So, slightly higher is 5000% higher…
You are in evade mode. I mean most rocky planets and moons have a meemoe radioactivity linear index of 1 , while the Earth is between around 5 to 50. If the Earth can be 5 to 50 times as radioactive as most planets then within this deviation from the average, Earth could easily had a semi molten surface. That’s if u believe the radiative decay model for geothermal emission, which I don’t.
Awesome that somebody can believe such nonsense.
xD
meemoe_uk:
Thankyou for your reply to me which you provide at October 19, 2013 at 11:50 am.
Sorry, but your answer is very incomplete. If this “energy of the galactic current” is creating mass in the Earth’s interior where it cannot be detected then why is that not happening at the Earth’s surface where it could be seen?
All the observed effects you cite are explicable as being effects of plate tectonics.
So, the only ‘evidence’ for the “energy of the galactic current” acting on the Earth is the asserted mass creation which cannot be detected.
Richard
why is that not happening at the Earth’s surface where it could be seen?
Earth’s surface and interior are 2 very different environments. The interior is highly electrically conductive, while the surface is less so. I don’t know whats going on down there so i can only speculate. A promising new field of study is that of plasmoid physics. Plasmoids are balls of plasma formed from electrical discharge. They are known to collapse in on themselves down to nanoscopic scales creating extremely high energy environments. The scientific investigation of plasmoids has been much sidelined for decades. For decades a small group of scientists have been saying that plasmoids have a crucial role in nature and any understanding of nature must have plasmoids at its core but these people haven’t had significant science research funding. Recently though interest in plasmoids has been picking up along with funding. Amazingly, recently nuclear fusion was demonstrated to occur in plasmoids. Up till a few years ago , the only place where fusion was thought possible was at the centre of stars. Now it’s been demonstrated it can occur in electric discharges much less powerful than a lightning bolt. Lightning in the troposphere of earth can create temperatures over 1 billion degrees, it’s perfectly possible that electric discharges in other environments could get far hotter than that, hot enough for any type of nuclear fusion. Pure energy to matter creation has been demonstrated in our synchrotrons for decades. The energys required to do this are not much more than for the heaviest nuclear fusion. This means if heavy elements such as thorium and uranium exist in nautre, then direct energy to matter conversion probably exists too.
This of course creates a completely different interpretation of the genesis and evolution of the physical world. Bear in mind that its empirical evidence, real phyiscs, unlike the conventional stellar model which can never be evidence directly ( no one can go to the Sun’s core and check ). But old conservatives like Leif aren’t going to drop the old theories because of new evidence. When I mention plasmoid induced fusion to Leif he doesn’t explore the potentials and far reaching implications of plasmoid genesis of elements but instead just ignores them and pokes that the current lab evidence has not yet produced all the elements and that there’s no direct evidence of it in nature ( clue no one has had the funding to measure a lighthning bolt so carefully to detect fusion within it yet ).
So with this in mind I think there could be plasmoid actvity within the Earth concentrating galactic current to extremely high enegy densities, enough for nuclear fusion of elements and matter creation ( hydrogen ).
The very deepest boreholes into the Earth’s continental crust produced results unexpected by conventional geology. The deep continental crust is saturated in water, and hydrogen gas (!), the only theory I know that explains the hydrogen gas is subsurface plasmoid induced energy to matter conversion.
I follow plasmoid research and I’ve submitted articles to WUWT on the latest plasmoid news. It gets chucked straight in the WUWT bin because of its association with electric unverse theory. Never the less, plasmoid research is ongoing and is a current hot topic in plasma physics. Right now they are developing a new type of plasmoid generator, the 1st major redesign for 40 years. It is designed to be far more powerful than previous generators.We’re all lookng forward to it.
All the observed effects you cite are explicable as being effects of plate tectonics.
So, the only ‘evidence’ for the “energy of the galactic current” acting on the Earth is the asserted mass creation which cannot be detected.
When i assessed plate tectonic theory I found it was unsatisfactory so I rejected it as a myth. The geological phenomena attributed to plate tectonics are caused by something else.
meemoe_uk:
Thankyou. You have told me all I need to know when you write
So, instead you adopted an idea which creates new matter in the interior of the Earth where it can not be seen but not at the surface where it could be.
Oooooh Kaaaaaay
Richard
hehe. I take it you won’t be subscribing the focus fusion society for news on the 1st experiments with the proposed new DPF then?
Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.
~ sherlock holmes
& sherlock meemoe
truth is sometimes stranger than fiction
– old saying
yeah especially when the fiction has been drilled into your skull and everyone elses for the last umpteen years.
~ meemoe’s extension to the old saying
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 11:34 am
as such a charge builds up at the top of the troposhere. When it cracks ( a lightning bolt ) this charge Earths, leaving behind room for more charge to fall from the ionosphere to the top of the troposphere
nonsense, causality flows the other way. Sprites were predicted on theoretical grounds by Wilson in 1925, but only now do we have the technology to observe them.
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
Earth could easily had a semi molten surface.
It actually did have a completely molten surface as result of the collision that created the Moon.
richardscourtney says:
October 19, 2013 at 12:24 pm
drop the old theories because of new evidence
all the new evidence support the old theories in spectacular fashion..
nuclear fusion of elements
So you think fusion occurs on earth but not in the Sun, go figure…
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 1:22 pm
When i assessed plate tectonic theory I found it was unsatisfactory so I rejected it as a myth.
When you assessed something…That you don’t get it just display your illiteracy. I think we have wasted enough time on you.
lsvalgaard:
You do me an injustice at October 19, 2013 at 3:24 pm by attributing to me something I did not say.
I do NOT think “fusion occurs on earth but not in the Sun” and I do not know why you claim I do. I have NEVER said anything like that.
Richard
richardscourtney says:
October 19, 2013 at 3:46 pm
You do me an injustice at October 19, 2013 at 3:24 pm by attributing to me something I did not say.
Sorry for that, I copied pasted from meemoe and your name got copied by accident. This nonsense is, of course, all meemoes’s.
richardscourtney says:
October 19, 2013 at 3:46 pm
You do me an injustice at October 19, 2013 at 3:24 pm by attributing to me something I did not say.
Although, your comment:
“richardscourtney says:
October 19, 2013 at 1:29 pm
meemoe_uk: Thank you. You have told me all I need to know when you write…
Oooooh Kaaaaaay”
could be interpreted as support for meemoe.
In something akin to photosynthesis, but of rock?
Out of curiosity, why would intragalactic electricity currents cause a rock to grow and outpour more rock?
>Out of curiosity, why would intragalactic electricity currents cause a rock to grow and outpour more rock?
already told you.
nonsense, causality flows the other way. Sprites were predicted on theoretical grounds by Wilson in 1925, but only now do we have the technology to observe them.
We’re using different models in case you hadn’t noticed. We aren’t going to agree if you think 10^8Volts is generated by water evaporating and convecting.
It actually did have a completely molten surface as result of the collision that created the Moon.
I’ll take this decoy to mean you understand what i was saying about other planets radioactive content wrt Earth. And no I don’t believe the moon was created by another moon colliding into Earth therefore making the current moon theory, unlike the stellar core fusion model which was reasonable but not born out by evidence, this one is just plain daft and makes me smirk.
>So you think fusion occurs on earth but not in the Sun, go figure…
I’ve explained how it figures, and i also said that you would ignore my plasmoid explanation because its such a solid empirically evidenced threat to the 20th century theory on matter genesis. I was right and the theory I think is right.
When you assessed something…That you don’t get it just display your illiteracy. I think we have wasted enough time on you.
Nothing wrong with being a bit harder to convince than most. Feynman often lamented there were too many sheeple in academia, just nodding there heads and eating up everything that was fed to them. Well he wasn’t talking about me.
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 5:34 pm
We aren’t going to agree if you think 10^8Volts is generated by water evaporating and convecting.
I’m not fishing for agreement, just trying to tell you how things work. You are bit overestimating the voltage, it is more like 10^7 Volt, but such a voltage is easy to generate. A simple Van de Graff generator will do nicely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_de_Graaff_generator Perhaps your galactic electric current also can seek out all VdG generators and charge those. The total global current that flows between the surface and the ionosphere is small, only 1000 Ampere so we are not talking about huge energies, only about that which can be delivered by 30 car batteries.
And no I don’t believe the moon was created by another moon colliding into Earth
There is nothing as distasteful as willful ignorance.
I was right and the theory I think is right.
Based on the ignorance you display makes claims as to what is right highly dubious.
Nothing wrong with being a bit harder to convince than most.
Yet you uncritically lap up the pseudo-scientific nonsense of EU.
Oh god, it took me a couple minutes to stop laughing before I could type this comment. And that’s all I had to say.
Dr. S., you still here? Thanks for your time again today. You are da man for this E U dispute. Lots of good responses that help clarify some things for the rest of us…..
Try this on for size.
Interstellar magnetic field pressure on the heliotail, they say may be what is causing the offset recently found in the heliotail. Can that offset be correlated to the helio current sheet warp at the corona? And why not? Could changes in the warp latitude be an influence on rotation changes in the outer corona? That would cause changes in the wind up of the IMF?
Gazillion questions and more questions and more questions………………………………………………………….
The tilt of the sheet doesn’t seem to require much in solar magnetic strength to get er up. Or much in solar activity to inflate it… By comparison of this cycle to previous cycles.
http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Dipall.gif
http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Tilts.gif